Tom Cheng
Senior Learning Experience Designer · Michigan State University
Where I Started
I grew up in public housing in Hong Kong, raised by parents who never had the chance to finish elementary school. From a young age, I understood how much education can change lives. That belief led me to teaching. I studied education as an undergraduate and then spent four years teaching English and Computer Science in Hong Kong secondary schools. I was eager to bring educational technology into my classrooms, because I had always been drawn to technology. I experimented with custom HTML by building my personal blogs, and I loved digital media production, such as editing videos, creating images, and experimenting with different computer software.
I have always been interested in using educational technology in teaching and learning, and the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated its adoption dramatically. When classes moved online, an enormous amount of money suddenly flowed into devices, platforms, and subscriptions, all driven by the assumption that putting digital tools in students' hands would naturally lead to better learning. Skeptical by nature, I wasn't so sure. I watched schools purchase tools without a clear sense of what those tools could actually do, and without rethinking the curriculum to make good use of them. Most of the time, those tools were left underused. The money was spent, but the learning design wasn't there to scaffold the process. I was frustrated to see the money go to waste.
The Question I Took to Stanford
That frustration is what sent me to Stanford. I went specifically to study whether educational technology actually improves learning. Stanford's Learning Design and Technology master's program pushed me to think rigorously about what it means to design for learning rather than for engagement or novelty. Amid buzzwords such as "gamification" and "augmented reality," I maintain a strong interest in wellness in the digital age, driven by ideas like "no tech is also tech" and informed by studies on the impact of digital gadgets on human cognition.
The release of ChatGPT in November 2022 also coincided with my time at Stanford. Having had access to the GPT model in class as early as October 2022, before ChatGPT launched, I was excited by its potential to generate learning resources cheaply and to interact with learners at low cost, which has long been a persistent challenge in education. I helped develop two language-learning mobile apps, Say! and Ama Speak, where I contributed to learning experience design, user experience research, and user interface design. My capstone was Impromptu, an AI-powered speaking coach I designed and prototyped from scratch for Hong Kong secondary-school English learners, with 400+ survey responses and 50+ prototype testers.
Putting It to Work at MSU
From early 2024 to mid-2026, I was a Senior Learning Experience Designer at Michigan State University's Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation. I worked with faculty and instructors to build online courses, mostly for working professionals. I also co-launched a professional development workshop series for MSU faculty and instructors and a biweekly podcast about AI and education with my colleague MJ Jackson.
Since July 2026, I've been with Michigan State University's Office for Program Development and Management, continuing the same learning experience design work in a new unit of the university. Recent projects include courses for the Apple Manufacturing Academy (for small and medium-sized enterprises in the U.S.), the Apple Education Hub (for manufacturing frontline workers and managers), and various Coursera courses, such as "Introduction to Game Studies" (coming soon).
Where I Think Learning Experience Design Is Headed
More than a decade ago, people said MOOCs would make universities redundant, and that hasn't happened. It's true that a degree carries value that online courses can't easily replicate, from the network you build to the brand on the diploma. But online learning also serves people an in-person degree can't, such as working professionals who can't put a career and an income on hold. As AI speeds up course production, I think the real question is trust. I remember asking two Stanford friends who work in tech whether they would pay $2,500 for an online creative writing course from Stanford, and both said "Yes, absolutely!" People who buy a course from Stanford are trusting it to gatekeep well and make sure the knowledge is accurate, so they are buying partly the brand.
As for my own work, AI could replace my job easily, and I don't think that is the point. It could also replace financial planners, personal trainers, and insurance agents, yet what those roles share is the human side, especially motivation. AI can generate a perfect workout plan, but that doesn't mean anyone will follow it. I evangelize online learning to faculty who want to share their expertise. I build the structure for their courses and handle the media and logistics so they can focus on content. If a university decides one day that this can be automated, my job will be gone. But in 2016, Geoffrey Hinton predicted that AI would outperform radiologists within five years, and a decade later radiologists are still in demand. I expect the same for many roles built on human relationships.
Outside of Work
I enjoy traveling (I've been to all 50 U.S. states), volunteering, going to live music shows, reading, playing video games, listening to podcasts, watching YouTube videos, and trying new restaurants, to name a few. My volunteer work has spanned an LGBTQ+ organization (Stanford Pride), a business podcast (Think Fast Talk Smart), undergraduate admissions (Stanford Office of Undergraduate Admission), and alumni relations (LDT Energizer).